I'd find it amusing that the Republican leaders (notably Bannon) are all rallying around accused Senator Roy Moore over the claims of 4 different women regarding their experiences with his alleged unsavory and illegal sexual behavior.

This is much different than the position they were taking over Weinstein. (And of course, Weinstein's behavior SHOULD be condemned. No one is defending him.

But with the Roy Moore story, the claims are that is just more 'fake media' and a conspiracy to bring him down.

Horse ****

Apart from the similar claims from the 4 women (who don't even know each other), there are many people attesting that the girls (underage at the time) did talk about what had happened to them.

These clowns should be ashamed of themselves for saying that the girls are lying without even considering that there may be something to the accusations. All knee jerk and political. Disgusting.

I caught a great comment about what some are calling the developing Women's Spring on NPR this morning driving in to work. I don't recall the exact quote, but it was about all these dudes who are used to silencing their victims and getting plenty of enabling. The woman said something simply about how the fear and shame are changing sides. That makes me happy.

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

I caught a great comment about what some are calling the developing Women's Spring on NPR this morning driving in to work. I don't recall the exact quote, but it was about all these dudes who are used to silencing their victims and getting plenty of enabling. The woman said something simply about how the fear and shame are changing sides. That makes me happy.

I'd find it amusing that the Republican leaders (notably Bannon) are all rallying around accused Senator Roy Moore over the claims of 4 different women regarding their experiences with his alleged unsavory and illegal sexual behavior.

This is much different than the position they were taking over Weinstein. (And of course, Weinstein's behavior SHOULD be condemned. No one is defending him.

But with the Roy Moore story, the claims are that is just more 'fake media' and a conspiracy to bring him down.

Horse ****

Apart from the similar claims from the 4 women (who don't even know each other), there are many people attesting that the girls (underage at the time) did talk about what had happened to them.

These clowns should be ashamed of themselves for saying that the girls are lying without even considering that there may be something to the accusations. All knee jerk and political. Disgusting.

He's the movie Mogul who was using a casting couch on starlets. Lot of great films to his credit. Lots of girls who had to buy their careers with sex. Big Democratic donor. So he gets pilloried on Fox while it's all apologies for Moore who was actually practicing Pedophilia.

Note that most of the people coming forth about a lot of these folks endured their assaults so long ago that the Statute of Limitations means the perpetrator won't be prosecuted.

"Innocent until proven guilty" isn't in the constitution and it wasn't until 1895 that a court case (Coffin v. United States) acknowledged the notion.

It's an over-simplified summary of the constitutional limitation that the government may not impose a penalty (prison, fines) unless a person has had been tried and found guilty and that it is the burden of the government to prove a charge in court rather than of the accused to prove his innocence in court. "Due process"

It's not a limitation on the public or the media talking about charges. If it were you could never report a crime. You could never ask if any witnesses saw the crime. You could never ask if there were any other victims.

FOX News and every Republican would be in jail now for claiming Hillary was guilty of email when she's never even been charged, let alone tried and convicted.

Exactly. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a purely legal concept with no impact on what the media and general population are and should be allowed to discuss. It is also specifically problematic in cases of sexual assault and sexual harassment, as those charges are extremely hard to prove beyond reasonable doubt in the vast majority of cases. The stigma around victims of sexual assault and harassment, specifically when they are women, combined with that ridiculously low rate of conviction is more than enough to discourage victims to speak out. For obvious reasons the potential risks of speaking out rises exponentially when it concerns a man in a position of authority or with influence in the field you work or study in (the countless cases of sexual abuse by instrument teachers in music conservatories, for instance...).

Studies in Canada have shown that as little as 3% of charged cases led to convictions. And it is estimated that the vast majority of cases do not lead to charges, if they are even reported to the police at all.

So yeah, I want to agree with the idea of due process philosophically, but clearly, the system is failing the victims in sexual assault cases. Hiding behind the "innocent until proven guilty" argument instead of acknowledging that the system doesn't work and that something has to change in both the system and our culture is particularly cowardly.

You are happy to accept the trial by media if the unsourced accusations are against Hillary and Podesta, but now decry the attack of the savage hordes. I wonder what could be different.

Cheers,Andy

Well, as you know, that is exactly how DD works. I guess he doesn't have daughters.

Consider that all of the different women who can attest to Moore's behavior are from disparate locations and backgrounds. Plus several witnesses attest that the alleged victims told them what happened when those things happened. And DD seriously wants to be believe it is a political conspiracy.

You people? What the cheese are you on about? Does everything in your world have to straddle party lines? Sexual assault is not a partisan issue. I haven't even made any partisan points It is unquestionably deplorable. I'm not a judge and this isn't a court of law so I don't have to wait for a guilty verdict to draw my own conclusions, just as you have clearly drawn your own conclusions about my political affiliation and personal motives.

You people? What the cheese are you on about? Does everything in your world have to straddle party lines? Sexual assault is not a partisan issue. I haven't even made any partisan points It is unquestionably deplorable. I'm not a judge and this isn't a court of law so I don't have to wait for a guilty verdict to draw my own conclusions, just as you have clearly drawn your own conclusions about my political affiliation and personal motives.

Fack off.

You might take your own advice.

I for one still believe in due process.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Dusty, you are ignoring a BIG difference between the Clinton-Lewinsky affair and Moore. Lewinsky was a willing partner. Most of Moore's partners were under age and not willing. That constitutes pedophilia. Clinton was no pedophile.

I'm the bad one because I stand for due process. Anyway, enjoy the rest of the weekend.

Due process how? Trial by [right wing] press? Clinton denied he was having an affair, but Lewinsky wasn't busy calling him out on it. Moore has 3 (or is it 4) women who claim he molested them 30 some years ago, when they were under 18. Note that Moore probably cannot be prosecuted because of the Statute of Limitations, but I have problems with a known pedophile in any Government position.

Dusty, you are ignoring a BIG difference between the Clinton-Lewinsky affair and Moore. Lewinsky was a willing partner. Most of Moore's partners were under age and not willing. That constitutes pedophilia. Clinton was no pedophile.

Well, there is a lot that you're ignoring too. There were at least 4 others that claimed sexual harassment and rape, and they were tortured by the Clintons and the liberal media. They basically said that they were trailer trash prostitutes because of their allegations.

You want another difference? They didn't wait 40 years. You want another difference? They came out making their allegations.

These current ladies did not come out to make their allegations. They were sought out, and probably paid to make the allegations.

So, as far as I'm concerned let the due process begin.

However, I'm glad that we're making progress, because now, you people recognize sexual predators, whereas, back in the day of the Clintons, you ignored it. So that's something.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Due process how? Trial by [right wing] press? Clinton denied he was having an affair, but Lewinsky wasn't busy calling him out on it. Moore has 3 (or is it 4) women who claim he molested them 30 some years ago, when they were under 18. Note that Moore probably cannot be prosecuted because of the Statute of Limitations, but I have problems with a known pedophile in any Government position.

Well get used to it, because the liberals are starting to normalize pedophillia. That's next on the agenda, but with the establishment repubs making these allegations against Roy Moore, that might set their agenda back a few years, until the young puppies forget about it.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Well get used to it, because the liberals are starting to normalize pedophillia. That's next on the agenda, but with the establishment repubs making these allegations against Roy Moore, that might set their agenda back a few years, until the young puppies forget about it.

Are you claiming that Anthony Weiner should be pardoned? What he did is not as severe as what Moore did. And I don't think he was right.

I have not seen any evidence that John Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, or even Donald Trump were molesting underage girls. In fact, all but Weinstein had willing partners.

Jeez Dickerson, give your head a shake. The only one who has been accused of pedophilia is the Honorable Judge Moore.

As for narmalizing sexual assault, well there’s your hero, Donald “Grab ‘em by the *****” Trump.

Nearly all of the sexual harassment allegations so far involve grownups and either unwanted sexual advances or exposing oneself (or both). Such behaviours have absolutely nothing to do with politics. Unless the pedophile runs for public office.

Are you claiming that Anthony Weiner should be pardoned? What he did is not as severe as what Moore did. And I don't think he was right.

That would be expected of someone being honest and therefore consistent. The DD persona doesn't actually understand such things as honesty or ethics or morality, only We're right, You Guys (They) are wrong. There's no consideration or concept of consideration beyond this. When you get into what we expect reasonably psychologically developed adolescents to understand we're well beyond the DD persona's capacities, which are deeply authoritarian and presented here with anonymity and thus freedom from any real accountability. That's assuming the persona is a genuine representation of its source. It's much more likely the persona is a troll. Actually trollism is almost an inherent trait of authoritarians in any case--the proud ignorance and anti-sociability that makes Deplorables so proud of the label--the Rebel schtick in the South tends to have a lot of that nastiness in it, though certainly not always. But the DD Persona is the worst of the clueless and proud ignorance and depravity, thankfully sans much in the way of the real nastiness and schadenfreude that tends to accompany it.

I have not seen any evidence that John Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, or even Donald Trump were molesting underage girls. In fact, all but Weinstein had willing partners.

Such "nuances" are meaningless to the DD Persona. It's Us vs. You Guys, and that's really about it. No genuine sense of honor or ethics or morality or even right and wrong is really there--just Our Dogma/Us and You Guys, as hard as it may be to buy such an infantile mindset is really active in an apparent adult. Such is the nature of the Alt Right/Alternative Facts™ Crüe.

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

Well, there is a lot that you're ignoring too. There were at least 4 others that claimed sexual harassment and rape, and they were tortured by the Clintons and the liberal media. They basically said that they were trailer trash prostitutes because of their allegations.

You want another difference? They didn't wait 40 years. You want another difference? They came out making their allegations.

These current ladies did not come out to make their allegations. They were sought out, and probably paid to make the allegations.

So I guess your arbiter of right and wrong is Fox News, The American Thinker, and Breitbart?

I'm saying that we are in a place right now where there is no due process anymore, and we're using social media and MSM instead of the court systems to determine guilty or innocence, but in the process we've flipped it from 'innocent until proven guilty' to 'guilty until proven innocent'. Sane people realize that you can't prove innocence from allegations coming forward 40 years later.

To use the logic that most of you use, Hillary has never been charged with a crime, so no matter the allegations, she is innocent. Well, Roy Moore has never been charged as a sexual predator, or a pedophile crime either.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

I'm saying that we are in a place right now where there is no due process anymore, and we're using social media and MSM instead of the court systems to determine guilty or innocence, but in the process we've flipped it from 'innocent until proven guilty' to 'guilty until proven innocent'. Sane people realize that you can't prove innocence from allegations coming forward 40 years later.

If only you had the integrity to apply the exceedingly rare point you get right (apparently accidentally/only when it works for Your Team) honestly rather than purely for self-affirmation/to feed your self-interest.

But then that wouldn't be your persona (or very good trolling).

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

I'm saying that we are in a place right now where there is no due process anymore, and we're using social media and MSM instead of the court systems to determine guilty or innocence, but in the process we've flipped it from 'innocent until proven guilty' to 'guilty until proven innocent'. Sane people realize that you can't prove innocence from allegations coming forward 40 years later.

To use the logic that most of you use, Hillary has never been charged with a crime, so no matter the allegations, she is innocent. Well, Roy Moore has never been charged as a sexual predator, or a pedophile crime either.

To use your own logic, then Hillary is at no fault of anything.

Too bad you continually say quite the opposite.

Moore has not had his day in court (on this issue), true, but more than enough republicans in AL have recently.... and not of their own wishing...

But given the problems the party has already had with high level officials in AL, and the fact that Moore has already had his day in court multiple times in other areas and lost horribly, and the accusations against him with no real defense on his side...

It's amazing that so many can be riled up against me because I stand for 'due process'. When did this become a bad thing among you people?

Your persona's dishonesty includes its reading skills--because that's convenient, and because honesty would be very difficult in the persona's case. It would require some major changes. I'd explain to your persona why your perception of what's going on is obviously false to anyone who's not on Your Team and/or who can manage an even slightly functional degree of honesty, but your persona has consistently and repeatedly demonstrated it's incapable of honesty when it's not convenient (i.e. when the appearance of honesty doesn't happen out of pure accidental convenience), so there's no point.

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

The court of public opinion has never been subject to due process. Ever. Never ever ever.

Republicans aren't saying Roy Moore should drop out because he's been convicted of a crime. They're saying he should drop out because he was accused of one, multiple times, by multiple people, and it looks bad. If you can't understand that, then you're not going to get why it looks bad to begin with.

When someone only "gets" ethics right (the old Blind Squirrel Schtick) when they happen to line up with his personal sentiments/for his Team, and he utterly fails to get them or even apparently understand what they're actually about when they work against his personal sentiments and for the Other Team/You Guys, it's an indication that the person doesn't really even understand the ethics in question, only the team thing, which is of course a pathetic excuse for a sense of ethics. When this is true of someone's persona, that person is trolling.

Oddly such people/personas control the social climate online most of the time.

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

DD, you didn't seem to have any concerns about due process when accusations were made towards Hillary. Revisit your old posts.

In this latest accusation of assault of the then-16 year old, the alleged victim produced her high school yearbook and points to where Roy Moore is said to have signed it, even referencing the name of the restaurant where the girl was a waitress.

It is interesting how he now claims that he never heard of the girl, much less the diner.

We'll see. If he is innocent, he should offer to submit handwriting examples for comparison.

DD, you didn't seem to have any concerns about due process when accusations were made towards Hillary. Revisit your old posts.

In this latest accusation of assault of the then-16 year old, the alleged victim produced her high school yearbook and points to where Roy Moore is said to have signed it, even referencing the name of the restaurant where the girl was a waitress.

It is interesting how he now claims that he never heard of the girl, much less the diner.

We'll see. If he is innocent, he should offer to submit handwriting examples for comparison.

But imo he is not innocent.

I'll just say it's certainly not looking good for him.

Moore is a seriously unfit for public office, regardless--he's a hard core theocrat who doesn't understand basic constitutional principles due to chronic acute religiostupidification--so this problem has no effect on my political impression of him, which couldn't be much worse already. It may very much bear on my personal impression of him though. A politically and ideologically depraved theocrat can still be a good and honorable dude, even with a deep and glaring personal flaw. But if an otherwise good and honorable dude has both the glaring flaw of being a deeply religiostupidified theocrat as well as being a sexual predator of young girls ... well, the latter makes the former trivial by comparison.

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

Invested and unaware of or just not equipped to deal with their biases. Not usually stupid ... although that may also be a distinction without a difference (much like dishonesty and the denial of bias or the refusal/failure to address it at all sincerely).

Logged

- Feeding a troll just gives it a platform and amplifies its voice.

- Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves. - Richard Feynman- He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool. - Confucius

I've seen many reports that Gloria Allred is behind one or more of these allegations, discounting her motives, the reports go on to say how much has been paying the ladies to make their allegations public. Is any of this true? I don't know, again, allegations, allegations,....

I'm just saying unless you want a political process to turn into destruction by nothing but allegations, then keep feeding the people who are doing this.

Watch the episode of Orville for which I posted the link. That could be our future if we don't start getting it right.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

I've seen many reports that Gloria Allred is behind one or more of these allegations, discounting her motives, the reports go on to say how much has been paying the ladies to make their allegations public. Is any of this true? I don't know, again, allegations, allegations,....

I'm just saying unless you want a political process to turn into destruction by nothing but allegations, then keep feeding the people who are doing this.

Watch the episode of Orville for which I posted the link. That could be our future if we don't start getting it right.

THERE IS A 2002 ARTICLE FROM A LOCAL PAPER ON THE GUY.

Your claims about "allegations" and "process" are as phony as heck. Read the 'not always admired' section below.

This was a known thing to many locals, hence WHY the Washington Post teamed up with a local writer and tracked down the story.

You've seen 'reports' whose sole purpose is to give you enough reason to not believe anything. And you've swallowed them whole, apparently. If that actually isn't your belief, you have a funny way of showing it.

Of course, you can write out by name four women that accused Bill Clinton and some of the folks pursuing Moore, but I'll bet you haven't the faintest clue about the 16 women named that have accused Trump or the names of the actual accusers here. Pretty obvious what your actual standard for information is here.

I've seen many reports that Gloria Allred is behind one or more of these allegations, discounting her motives, the reports go on to say how much has been paying the ladies to make their allegations public. Is any of this true? I don't know, again, allegations, allegations,....

I'm just saying unless you want a political process to turn into destruction by nothing but allegations, then keep feeding the people who are doing this.

Watch the episode of Orville for which I posted the link. That could be our future if we don't start getting it right.

I admit DD. I am not the least bit surprised by your bias. When the allegations meet your agenda, you believe them. When they don't, you dismiss them.

You remind me of the wife of Jerry Sandusky. He was convicted of molesting kids, and some of the offenses occurred in his basement while his wife was upstairs. Yet she insisted that nothing happened.

Why? She was married to the creep, and no matter how bad the charges were, she stood by her man.

Why? She was married to the creep, and no matter how bad the charges were, she stood by her man.

Like Hillary stood by her man. LOL!

Actually, I never he was innocent or guilty. I've just been concerned about allegations being made 40 years after the fact, and using that as the standard for guilt. There is not enough time before the election for him to properly defend himself. So this attack was well timed for a reason.

There - was there a defense in that?

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Actually, I never he was innocent or guilty. I've just been concerned about allegations being made 40 years after the fact, and using that as the standard for guilt. There is not enough time before the election for him to properly defend himself. So this attack was well timed for a reason.

There - was there a defense in that?

Or, the national conversation about sexual harassment/assault victims has changed for the better, and the women are finally comfortable with coming forward now, especially since it is no longer possible for powerful people to easily suppress stories like this-- there is little tolerance for that anymore, and there has been a large outpouring of support.

see: how quickly #metoo went viral, and even the most head-in-the-sand people across the nation went "sexual assault/harassment is way more widespread than we realized this must stop since I actually know X victims personally"

My bet is on that being the reason for coming forward after so many years. 40 years ago stories of assault and harassment could easily be swept under the rug by powerful connected people. That is no longer the case.

What startles me the most isn't the R vs D aspect of the conversation around Moore. What blows my mind is that he is being defended by people saying that god and jesus are OK with it, because otherwise a D would be elected, and that underage girls with older men are all over in the bible. That rationalization logic is utterly disgusting.

Or, the national conversation about sexual harassment/assault victims has changed for the better, and the women are finally comfortable with coming forward now, especially since it is no longer possible for powerful people to easily suppress stories like this-- there is little tolerance for that anymore, and there is a large outpouring of support.

see: how quickly #metoo went viral, and even the most head-in-the-sand people across the nation went "sexual assault/harassment is way more widespread than we realized this must stop since I actually know X victims personally"

My bet is on that being the reason for coming forward after so many years. 40 years ago stories of assault and harassment could easily be swept under the rug by powerful connected people. That is no longer the case.

What startles me the most isn't the R vs D aspect of the conversation around Moore. What blows my mind is that he is being defended by people saying that god and jesus are OK with it, because otherwise a D would be elected, and that underage girls with older men are all over in the bible. That rationalization logic is utterly disgusting.

According to one lamebrain Republican theologian, it's ok because Joseph and Mary, well, you know. (Which might be missing one significant ingredient of the Christmas miracle)

It never ceases to amaze me - Democrat caught cheating on wife, committing sexual harassment, etc. = end of political careerRepublican caught doing same = Republican cries crocodile tears, career continues as if nothing happened.

And the Republicans say the Democrats have no morals.

It does make me wonder, is the reason that republicans blindly hate Hillary so much really just that she stood by her man? At the time they were demanding that a woman do so rather than leave him, and by golly she had the gall to do exactly what they said she should. It's enraging that your political opponent does what you say is right (and all you want to do is score points), and even more enraging because what then do you attack them with? She did what we said she should?

Actually, I never he was innocent or guilty. I've just been concerned about allegations being made 40 years after the fact, and using that as the standard for guilt. There is not enough time before the election for him to properly defend himself. So this attack was well timed for a reason.

What say you in regard to the FBI releasing Hillary emails right before the election? IIRC, you were quite pleased with that. And yet disappointed that none of them were damning enough to lead to an indictment.[/quote]

Your outrage is selective and laughable DD.

And as far as 40 years after the fact, you think that those offenses should be swept aside? Ignored? This perv is trying to be a US SENATOR.

Actually, I never he was innocent or guilty. I've just been concerned about allegations being made 40 years after the fact, and using that as the standard for guilt. There is not enough time before the election for him to properly defend himself. So this attack was well timed for a reason.

There - was there a defense in that?

"I never defended him, I just said that we shouldn't even be discussing this or taking it seriously before an election."

Your lack of reading comprehension is showing. I have always been talking about process. In this case, the process that is being used against Roy Moore, but process never the less.

The court of public opinion has never been bound by due process, rightly or wrongly. Can you honestly say, unequivocally, that you give every allegation you hear the benefit of the doubt, such that you presume the alleged party's innocence until proven guilty in a court of law? Because your own statements on the subject of the Clintons, Benghazi, Emails-ad-nauseam, etc belie that assertion.

It very much seems like you're bemoaning the lack of due process in public opinion raking Moore over the coals when you have no such qualms in continuing to allege baseless, unfounded, and utterly disproven claims about Clintons, in whose case there have been EXHAUSTIVE investigations by professionals that have turned up nothing criminal.

The court of public opinion has never been bound by due process, rightly or wrongly. Can you honestly say, unequivocally, that you give every allegation you hear the benefit of the doubt, such that you presume the alleged party's innocence until proven guilty in a court of law? Because your own statements on the subject of the Clintons, Benghazi, Emails-ad-nauseam, etc belie that assertion.

It very much seems like you're bemoaning the lack of due process in public opinion raking Moore over the coals when you have no such qualms in continuing to allege baseless, unfounded, and utterly disproven claims about Clintons, in whose case there have been EXHAUSTIVE investigations by professionals that have turned up nothing criminal.

Well, it's just a little more than that. People are trying to use the allegations as justification to make Moore drop out of the race, or to have the Senate take him out if he is elected. Opinions are one thing, but taking people out, or punishing them is another thing.

I don't care what your opinion is, but when you call for someone to lose their job per an allegation, then, that's over the top. IMHO.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Well, it's just a little more than that. People are trying to use the allegations as justification to make Moore drop out of the race, or to have the Senate take him out if he is elected. Opinions are one thing, but taking people out, or punishing them is another thing.

I don't care what your opinion is, but when you call for someone to lose their job per an allegation, then, that's over the top. IMHO.

Well, you had the scaffold built and the rope hung to hang Hillary Clinton over Benghazi when after the investigation completed it turned out that the Republican Congress had withheld money to add to embassy defensive staff, while Clinton herself had nothing to do with the demonstration that became a riot and ended in the deaths of the Ambassador and 3 others.

I also should point out that a lot of the Catholic Priest molestation accusations occurred long after the molestation. In a lot of cases, the victims blame themselves and suppress the affair.

Note that one accusation against Moore is possibly a fluke. Five is another matter.

Well, you had the scaffold built and the rope hung to hang Hillary Clinton over Benghazi when after the investigation completed it turned out that the Republican Congress had withheld money to add to embassy defensive staff, while Clinton herself had nothing to do with the demonstration that became a riot and ended in the deaths of the Ambassador and 3 others.

I also should point out that a lot of the Catholic Priest molestation accusations occurred long after the molestation. In a lot of cases, the victims blame themselves and suppress the affair.

Note that one accusation against Moore is possibly a fluke. Five is another matter.

She lied in public. Video taped.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Well, you had the scaffold built and the rope hung to hang Hillary Clinton over Benghazi when after the investigation completed it turned out that the Republican Congress had withheld money to add to embassy defensive staff, while Clinton herself had nothing to do with the demonstration that became a riot and ended in the deaths of the Ambassador and 3 others.

I also should point out that a lot of the Catholic Priest molestation accusations occurred long after the molestation. In a lot of cases, the victims blame themselves and suppress the affair.

Note that one accusation against Moore is possibly a fluke. Five is another matter.

Agreed. DD, it is disingenuous for you to take that stance while you screamed for Hillary to be fired and indicted. Because of the way you take different stands depending on the way the political wind blows you have zero credibility.

Agreed. DD, it is disingenuous for you to take that stance while you screamed for Hillary to be fired and indicted. Because of the way you take different stands depending on the way the political wind blows you have zero credibility.

Zero cred goes both ways.

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

Trump does that ALL THE TIME. Jeff Sessions literally did that on Monday. Where’s your equivalent outrage? If you don’t get mad at those people, and you do get mad at some lady in a pantsuit, then maybe you need to shut your mouth and contemplate on why you get piled on here every single time you reply.

Well, it's just a little more than that. People are trying to use the allegations as justification to make Moore drop out of the race, or to have the Senate take him out if he is elected. Opinions are one thing, but taking people out, or punishing them is another thing.

I don't care what your opinion is, but when you call for someone to lose their job per an allegation, then, that's over the top. IMHO.

Where was your outrage over Hillary? Were you outraged over Bill Clinton?

Didn't vote for either of them! And now you're just being a crybaby. Suck it up snowflake! For an old man, you can be such a baby when the big scary world doesn't jive with the pretty little castle you want to live in.

Note that one accusation against Moore is possibly a fluke. Five is another matter.

I'm surprised Baron von Bone didn't jump on this.

Asserting mutual corroboration from several allegations commits the logical fallacy of begging the question. It assumes the truth of the very proposition to be tested. We haven't yet determined whether each allegation is true, so none can be corroborative of the others.

In recent years there have been several attempts to erode what you Americans call due process, starting with sexual allegations. Campaigns like always believing the woman (what about male victims of rape??), rape shield laws and allowing criminal prosecutions based only on an accusation with no supporting evidence. These erode important and hard-won principles like the presumption of innocence and equality of arms. This has occurred across the Anglophone world, with Canada and England leading the way. Just recently, it seems that the state criminal justice apparatus (police, courts and prisons/probation etc) are now to be bypassed as all too difficult and inconvenient. Much easier to splatter allegations across social media and news media. The examination of the issues is conducted, as Dusty says, in the media and not in a court governed by well-established rules. Punishment is usually in the form of losing job and livelihood, family and friends. This is not the way we deal with criminal behaviour in civilised democracies. The process applied is more akin to the Lynch mob, which I assume you Americans don't want to go back to.

Even more recently, there seems to be a campaign against elected representatives. I grace several countries with my presence on a regular basis and have seen near-identical stories about 'politician perverts.' Many of the claims are really innocuous, hand-on-knee-in-1979 stuff, and not anywhere near the threshold of criminal conduct. But what counts is the damage to reputation, forcing an extra-judicial punishment of resignation and loss of career. The stories are so similar and have come out so close together that I wonder whether there is an element of coordination behind the scenes.

My recommendation to posters on this thread therefore, is to stop squabbling about political partisan sides and et tu quoque. The danger here is that democratic mandates are being undermined by (I can't resist the mixed metaphor) kneejerk fingerpointing which is only scrutinised according to current journalistic standards ie not very well. Beware.

Didn't vote for either of them! And now you're just being a crybaby. Suck it up snowflake! For an old man, you can be such a baby when the big scary world doesn't jive with the pretty little castle you want to live in.

You know, I refrain from calling people names just because they have a different beliefs than me. I have many friends that basically believe the same crap you do, and we get along just Fine Business. Why can't you?

For the folks that believe in hypocrisy, consider why the the House and Senate are passing a resolution for sexual harassment training? Seems like a confession for those that are piling on Judge Roy Moore. What about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden (ex-VP)

With all the info about him that's been out there for years, I never saw any outrage of him either.

Oh well, hypocrisy only flows in one direction, according to the leftist liberals.

But, I don't hold that against anyone. LOL!

Logged

Energy City Horizons Symphonic BandEnergy City Big BandEnergy City Dixieland BandRiver Pointe Church Praise and Worship Band

On the other hand, without qualifying evidence to the contrary, should victims not be taken at their word in the court of public opinion?

What's happening in this election, in particular, is an individual of already questionable ethical behavior, who has a documented history of questionable behavior, being accused as part of a larger societal awakening that

Quote

it's ok

for victims to come forward. Roy Moore's reputation was already tarnished well before any of this happened. When confronted with those facts, his supporters doubled down on denial, blamed the women, and created a firestorm that's burning them alive.

The basic point that "accusal is all it takes" to ruin someone is well taken, but the opposite is equally true: Victims that cannot feel safe to go public are ruined.

The basic reputations of the accused are also extremely relevant here. Roy Moore went into this with printed reports of abuse a decades ago. He went into it having defied the Supreme Court, and having been removed from the bench. His integrity was absolutely questionable, and it's worth having that conversation at election time. It's also troubling to many that he hides himself behind a cloak of religion while acting in ways which undermine that position.

For the opposite, let's see what happens with George Takei. He's had a spotless reputation for decades, and there's been resistance to blindly accept his sole accuser.

If someone has spent decades in the public sphere ruining their own reputation, it shouldn't be surprising that public opinion sours on them when multiple people make accusations.

You know, I refrain from calling people names just because they have a different beliefs than me. I have many friends that basically believe the same crap you do, and we get along just Fine Business. Why can't you?

For the folks that believe in hypocrisy, consider why the the House and Senate are passing a resolution for sexual harassment training? Seems like a confession for those that are piling on Judge Roy Moore. What about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden (ex-VP)

With all the info about him that's been out there for years, I never saw any outrage of him either.

Oh well, hypocrisy only flows in one direction, according to the leftist liberals.

But, I don't hold that against anyone. LOL!

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa!

You don't know what I believe, snowflake! But I'll spell it out for ya! People like you give actual conservatives a bad name.

You know, I refrain from calling people names just because they have a different beliefs than me. I have many friends that basically believe the same crap you do, and we get along just Fine Business. Why can't you?

For the folks that believe in hypocrisy, consider why the the House and Senate are passing a resolution for sexual harassment training? Seems like a confession for those that are piling on Judge Roy Moore. What about Creepy Uncle Joe Biden (ex-VP)

With all the info about him that's been out there for years, I never saw any outrage of him either.

Oh well, hypocrisy only flows in one direction, according to the leftist liberals.

But, I don't hold that against anyone. LOL!

Again, hypocrisy is about a person and their own standards. Not others. Have evangelicals and the conservative right lost their morals and ethics so much that they have none of their own to look at or uphold?

Asserting mutual corroboration from several allegations commits the logical fallacy of begging the question. It assumes the truth of the very proposition to be tested. We haven't yet determined whether each allegation is true, so none can be corroborative of the others.

In recent years there have been several attempts to erode what you Americans call due process, starting with sexual allegations. Campaigns like always believing the woman (what about male victims of rape??), rape shield laws and allowing criminal prosecutions based only on an accusation with no supporting evidence. These erode important and hard-won principles like the presumption of innocence and equality of arms. This has occurred across the Anglophone world, with Canada and England leading the way. Just recently, it seems that the state criminal justice apparatus (police, courts and prisons/probation etc) are now to be bypassed as all too difficult and inconvenient. Much easier to splatter allegations across social media and news media. The examination of the issues is conducted, as Dusty says, in the media and not in a court governed by well-established rules. Punishment is usually in the form of losing job and livelihood, family and friends. This is not the way we deal with criminal behaviour in civilised democracies. The process applied is more akin to the Lynch mob, which I assume you Americans don't want to go back to.

Even more recently, there seems to be a campaign against elected representatives. I grace several countries with my presence on a regular basis and have seen near-identical stories about 'politician perverts.' Many of the claims are really innocuous, hand-on-knee-in-1979 stuff, and not anywhere near the threshold of criminal conduct. But what counts is the damage to reputation, forcing an extra-judicial punishment of resignation and loss of career. The stories are so similar and have come out so close together that I wonder whether there is an element of coordination behind the scenes.

My recommendation to posters on this thread therefore, is to stop squabbling about political partisan sides and et tu quoque. The danger here is that democratic mandates are being undermined by (I can't resist the mixed metaphor) kneejerk fingerpointing which is only scrutinised according to current journalistic standards ie not very well. Beware.

Well given the abysmally low rate of conviction (let alone the rate of charges being brought and let alone the rate of actual denunciations), clearly these "important and hard-won principles" are failing victims in this particular area.

How exactly do you prove the absence of sexual consent beyond reasonable doubt? How exactly do you prove beyond reasonable doubt that certain actions constituted harassment and not simple flirting?

Yeah, good luck with that...

And by the way, your mention of male victims in opposition to "believing the woman" is a very stupid argument and obvious fallacy. One doesn't have to disbelieve male victims to believe female victims. There is no opposition there. There is a big stigma on male victims that prevents them coming forward. There is one on female victims too, they are of a different nature, yet both are results and symptoms of how patriarchy messes us up.

Males often don't come forward because they are afraid of being seen by others as weak to have been a victim of a female (or they feel weak themselves and are attacked in their "masculinity"), females don't because in many cases it would lead to marginalization, whether economic (loss of job or future employability in their field in cases where their abuser is an authority figure), social (how many rape victims who came out became parias for daring to accuse a well-respected man? how many friends do rape victims lose when their abuser is in the same social circles), or sexual (female victims' sex lives are almost systematically scrutinized, if not in court, in the media or public opinion, in an effort to demonstrate that they're really just promiscuous women incapable of refusing consent...).

In both cases the stigma stems directly from patriarchal ideas deeply entrenched in our society and how we define masculinity, feminity and the roles of genders. In both cases it's regrettable and we can only wish, in everyone's best interest, to eliminate those sources of stigma so that all victims feel comfortable coming forward. And in both cases it goes to prove that the justice system in its current form is not adapted to deal with the vast majority of sexual abuse cases.

Again, hypocrisy is about a person and their own standards. Not others. Have evangelicals and the conservative right lost their morals and ethics so much that they have none of their own to look at or uphold?

@BOB: There was a really telling piece on public radio this morning about how evangelicals have had to morally compromise in the Trump era, and what that means for their internal culture. I'm a highly religious individual who tends to vote in line with those values, but I could never imagine the mental and ethical contortions that the evangelical right has had to do to maintain party purity.

Of interest here... a picture surfaces of Al Franken making a horrible joke and a story of harassing a female comedian, photo looked older I haven't read when it happened yet. Guess what, that was wrong, too. McConnell came out saying he wants the ethics committee to investigate. Methinks that committee will be really busy if that is the chosen path.

My favorite part, I saw a couple of conservatives noting that the only solution is to have robot politicians. Funny that their brains went there rather than just electing women.

It will be interesting to see if Franken survives this. My initial guess is that he would if the picture is all there was... but he was a comedian on the road and in a lot of writers rooms... Places not known for good behavior.

Weiner dude denied it, and he was attacked for it. Spacey and CK acknowledged and apologized. still attacked for it.

Is there anything wanted other than simply attacking and trying to take down anyone who has had a single incident of sexual misconduct in their past?

And is there a time limit? The current environment my be against certain things, but standards were different 30 years ago. Are we necessarily going to try to apply standards of today to the time of then?

Otherwise... especially as this gets into claim of "harassment" rather than the underage sex or self sex acts... yeah, that pool gets VERY large.

Weiner dude denied it, and he was attacked for it. Spacey and CK acknowledged and apologized. still attacked for it.

Is there anything wanted other than simply attacking and trying to take down anyone who has had a single incident of sexual misconduct in their past?

And is there a time limit? The current environment my be against certain things, but standards were different 30 years ago. Are we necessarily going to try to apply standards of today to the time of then?

Otherwise... especially as this gets into claim of "harassment" rather than the underage sex or self sex acts... yeah, that pool gets VERY large.

Let's watch the reaction to Franken's statement. All of the other statements were not statement of actual apology. Franken takes a different route:

Quote

"The first thing I want to do is apologize: to Leeann, to everyone else who was part of that tour, to everyone who has worked for me, to everyone I represent, and to everyone who counts on me to be an ally and supporter and champion of women. There's more I want to say, but the first and most important thing—and if it's the only thing you care to hear, that's fine—is: I'm sorry.I respect women. I don't respect men who don't. And the fact that my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed.But I want to say something else, too. Over the last few months, all of us—including and especially men who respect women—have been forced to take a good, hard look at our own actions and think (perhaps, shamefully, for the first time) about how those actions have affected women.For instance, that picture. I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture, and it doesn't matter. There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture. And, what's more, I can see how millions of other women would feel violated by it—women who have had similar experiences in their own lives, women who fear having those experiences, women who look up to me, women who have counted on me.Coming from the world of comedy, I've told and written a lot of jokes that I once thought were funny but later came to realize were just plain offensive. But the intentions behind my actions aren't the point at all. It's the impact these jokes had on others that matters. And I'm sorry it's taken me so long to come to terms with that.While I don't remember the rehearsal for the skit as Leeann does, I understand why we need to listen to and believe women’s experiences.I am asking that an ethics investigation be undertaken, and I will gladly cooperate.And the truth is, what people think of me in light of this is far less important than what people think of women who continue to come forward to tell their stories. They deserve to be heard, and believed. And they deserve to know that I am their ally and supporter. I have let them down and am committed to making it up to them."

Very different statement that acknowledges the effect on the other person AND other persons in the world. He is probably going to falter on for a bit, but a resignation would not be out of the question here. Note that every time the statement drifts to an excuse or a 'but' he smartly brought it back to the experience on the other side. Very different way to think about these things.